[I am *so* not subscribed. Cc me if you particularly want me to read
what you have to say. Do not expect a reply.]
There are 5 people listed in the -legal top 10 who are not DDs now
and of those: Andrew Suffield stopped posting when he was still a DD
IIRC
Basically when I quit. I spent about
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And is attached for convinience.
[I'm not subscribed to this list]
bin5dUThOfMl2.bin
Description: PGP Key 0x98ACC10A.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
got to be on master too. I seem to
have accidentally killed off all my copies of it, thought I still had
one, oh well)
--
Andrew Suffield
mindx.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 01:43:14PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, obviously mutt sucks, why did it put a comma there? Unencoded
non-ASCII characters are invalid in mail headers though.
--
Andrew Suffield
signature.asc
Description: Digital
It's due to some recent and inconveniently timed personal events
rather than *anything* within Debian, but I'm going to be reducing my
involvement considerably. I'm sure people who have no insight into my
life will claim otherwise; they're full of shit, if you care. If you
don't already know my
, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Curious. But I've since found a paper which observes that, for no
apparent reason, the 'ch' sound in English tends to map onto an -i
ending rather than the -u which most of the other 'sharp' consonants
tend to get... interesting oddity.
Indeed. I just thought about
translation.
Interesting. I guess that means there's no real issue here.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
. If a word has no translation then leave it alone, don't
make one up just because it sounds odd.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
what we call it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
stops - that's a pause in
there, like a glottal stop) then there might be, but we didn't.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
accurate,
wrong or even completely untrue.
Other possible descriptions include lemon sorbet, and exuberence.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
So if I were to diff the Debian archive against the Fedora one, I'd be
contributing to Fedora? Cool! That'll bolster my CV a bit.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:29:14AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
This says you are wrong:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
So if I were to diff the Debian archive against
of our suggestions were of the this is way too confusing
to read variety rather than the this is non-free variety, and if they
didn't take those, that's just fine.
Actually they took most (all?) of those.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
in the list archives. The index is updated
roughly every five minutes and covers the entire public archive on
lists.debian.org. Lists which don't have public archives aren't
indexed.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
, since
it's not incorporated with limits on liability.
Bugger.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
to email is really quite pitiful...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
the need to talk about it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 10:56:32AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Andrew Suffield]
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 09:28:26PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Fortunately nobody needs to justify their decision to killfile
you to anyone but themselves. Or even a decision for a group
and appropriateness of differing
conversational styles is not a new one, nor has anything new been
brought to it this week. It's only peripherally related, by subject
matter.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
that this principle does not hold?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 05:25:52PM -0600, Eldon Koyle wrote:
On Aug 13 0:02+0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 12:10:07AM +0200, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:
For how long do we have to continue to wade through this flood of
emails regarding the terrible state of heart
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 01:32:16PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 06:14:51PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 10:19:32AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
You're a smart guy Andrew (definitely smarter than me)
Now half a dozen people are going
is self-defeating.
[0] http://www.pledgebank.com/killfileandrew
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
every one of your claims and
you gave up.
Anybody else think they can prove their accusations?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:09:16PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
My response is simply
this: it's lies. I challenge anybody who thinks otherwise to present
evidence.
So far (three days) we've had one person try, and give up after I
explained every case. I think that says a lot for the accuracy
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 04:32:52PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
Andrew Suffield writes:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:09:16PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
My response is simply
this: it's lies. I challenge anybody who thinks otherwise to present
evidence.
So far (three days) we've had
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 12:10:07AM +0200, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:
For how long do we have to continue to wade through this flood of
emails regarding the terrible state of heart of Andrew Suffield?
Until people stop making accusations.
What
is the ultimate purpose of this discussion?
I think
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 05:09:35PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:23:18PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:10:04PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Did you not read my original mail? I
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 12:42:37PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Looks like a perfectly justified response to me.
Which is the basic problem isn't it? Communication involves not only how
responses look to oneself but how they look to other
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 10:19:32AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:09:16PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
There is a small group of people in this project who have spent the
past several years trashing me in every forum they can. They've been
putting around this notion
obviously
I'd deliberately avoided saying who, the implication is that the
reader should make up their own mind.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 12:07:54AM +0100, Andrew Saunders wrote:
On 8/9/05, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is: think for yourself, and consider the sources of what you think you
know. How accurate is it *really*? What do you find when you look at
the things which actually
you don't agree with.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:23:00AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Andrew Suffield]
I acknowledge that I occasionally write mails which can be sharp and
pointy, but generally it's just in response to similarly sharp
mails. It's hardly uncommon in Debian;
I suspect we would reduce
GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:10:04PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
In my experience, it is sometimes necessary to get somebody's
attention, and it does sometimes work. The trick is one of
judgement. I stand by mine and challenge
it's what you wanted.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 09:59:26PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
That's probably the important case anyway. I'm not really bothered by
an organisation calling itself the 'Debian Core Consortium'. I am
bothered by somebody producing something that is called Debian
'.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
see him not wasting
time on trying to fix brainlessly broken crap but instead just
ignoring it and carrying on.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
to misattribute works to
start with, and it has not somehow become *more* illegal by adding
noise to a license.
Certainly this is no excuse for making a work non-free.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
being too restrictive as people complaining about the list not being
restrictive enough.
I'm pretty sick of hearing Santiago bitch about how the debian lists
still don't reject all mail, does that count? It's getting *really*
old.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http
grapes bullshit is getting really old.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
)
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
thing to adress this.
The reaction was exactly what everybody predicted would happen. What
were you expecting from a hopelessly biased and braindamaged survey
sent to -user? The questions were formulated to permit no other result.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 03:37:02PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:44:22AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 09:21:42AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 05:34:51PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
duplicated, or a blanket grant
that part of the text was useful to you. Why do you even have
to ask?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:00:45PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 09:55:12AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 03:37:02PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
You wrote 'specification', I wrote 'standards documents'.
I call things by their real names
.
They have never suggested any other definition of 'Free' for other
stuff, nor labelled the GFDL as 'Free' other than in its
name. Attempts to extract information on this subject are met with
dismissal.
So goodness knows what it could mean.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
do when we
give up on trying to get the FSF to fix the thing once, centrally.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
discrete groups of people together, who have radically
different motivations. A very strange choice of sample set. I would
expect the two groups to give very different answers to several of the
questions.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:37:20AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
Ok, and now I give the word to the 'Debian don't need no stinking marketing'
counter argument :-)
Avaunt, smelly marketer.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
a lie
-- Wizard's Fifth Rule, Terry Goodkind
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
we don't use material from contrib and non-free
by default.
Putting these drivers into main instead of contrib would not alter
this, because it still wouldn't work without non-free. Any *practical*
difference?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 05:35:59PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Andrew Suffield writes:
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 07:51:58PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
You also need to turn this question around and ask it the other way:
does having these drivers in contrib actually hurt anything
interested in trying?
It's on my todo list, but I have a couple of binary-only drivers to
tackle first.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
to turn this question around and ask it the other way:
does having these drivers in contrib actually hurt anything?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
that they are neither executable code nor
functional end-user documentation?
No. The exception is the bits which are required by law, not license
holder (and then only grudgingly, but we don't really have time to sit
and wait for legislators to get a clue).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew
not encourage it to continue by supporting them. Those documents
should all have been released under free licenses, and they weren't.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
usually forget to change the subject line when they change the
subject
Anything on a Debian list that looks like a single large 'thread' is
invariably several dozen threads, mislabelled.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
and trademarks
in order to do this.
That corporation cannot and will not be the organisation currently
referred to as 'Debian'. Nor could it do what Debian does. The absence
of control is fundamental to our organisational structure.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 01:26:19PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 09:33:22PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
It's a thought anyway. Those involved with SPI have probably had some
thoughts along these lines before, I imagine
to get used to
it.
though, honestly, Debian seems pretty well lined up in that
category too.
Really can't see why you think that.
hot-babe.
Are you seriously suggesting that is a significant part of what Debian
does?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 10:08:23AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 03:31:47PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
Do you have any suggestion as to something that'd be a consistent
revenue source for Debian
/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
people think.
I can't imagine what we'd use the money for, and it'd just be more
bandwidth consumption for stupid users (personally, I blocked google
ads a long time ago). Where would be the point?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:09:19PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:35:51PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06:19:32PM +0100, Pete van der Spoel wrote:
Or is the whole Ubuntu thing (where I understand Mark Shuttleworth has
hired
a large
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 01:28:19PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 09:15:00PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:09:19PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
Fortunately, that is not the case with Canonical.
Yes it is. Fork and forget is Canonical's
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:23:44AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 09:15:00PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:09:19PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:35:51PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06
for money right now. What we have mostly just
sits in a bank account getting slowly devalued by inflation. So fund
raising exercises aren't really a good idea.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06:16:53PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
Isn't this a great idea that Debian could borrow? I think this could
generate some nice publicity/income for the Debian project, I mean
you've already got the domain name. Personaly I'd rather
money is very difficult.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
on anything resembling a short timescale, even for
stuff which actually matters.
I can't imagine why anybody would care what you do with it,
though. People stick those things all over the place.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:17:27AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 12:25:21PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
And again, I don't believe the freedom to prosecute with patent
accusations is an important freedom to protect, any more than
freedom to take my software
valid and
legitimate for a free license to restrict this freedom.
Same old bogus comparison; you never *had* the freedom to take the
software proprietary, so you can't protect it. You *did* have the
freedom to prosecute with patent accusations.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
possibly result in B
being permitted to continue their branch.
I suppose this is a case where A can screw B.
Freedom to fork is effectively denied. This is reasonably simple to
engineer just by patenting everything you can think of in the given
field.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 02:18:37PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Andrew Suffield:
Termination for non-compliance, in a publically redistributed work, is
just a reflection of copyright law; it doesn't really change what you
can and can't do.
We now have a (lower) German court ruling
being free software.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 03:50:26PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 01:14:42PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
So your belief that the GPL is free is entirely based on a belief that
RMS is wrong, and your belief that RMS is wrong
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 03:27:58PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 02:41:03PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-09-17 10:05]:
The GPL does much the same. If someone distributes GPLed software
without complying with section 3
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 04:08:37PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Company B cannot make counterclaims from its defensive patent
portfolio, because that would invoke the termination clause and kill
its modified version. Company B has no practical
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 03:07:28PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 04:08:37PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Why are we concerned about people who patent pieces of software while
claiming that they'll only use these patents
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 12:04:00AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 12:12:53AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The implication of the post I replied to was that any license that
allows the removal of some set of the rights
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 01:14:42PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 12:04:00AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
RMS has in the past claimed that failure to abide by the terms of the
GPL results in a permanent loss of those rights
** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 12:12:53AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:05:29AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The GPL does much the same. If someone distributes GPLed software
without complying with section 3 (which gives you
** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
server-side, but compose (Multi_key, default mapping is shifted
RALT) is a feature of the X *client*.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
is in the eye of the
beholder - that's about normal for humans, really.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
are not interested in
reasons why we might be wrong.
I can't imagine how we could do things differently.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 10:46:29PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 03:47:40PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Philippe Troin wrote:
I always vote, probably for the same reasons I vote in my country's
elections (mostly
business.
That attitude was the cause of the Earth-Minbari war. The rest of the
world does not share your notions of polite and respectful, for
all values of your. I find yours to be pretty much the opposite.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
